Fair Pay to Play Act

D1 Mens Lacrosse
wgdsr
Posts: 9997
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 7:00 pm

Re: Fair Pay to Play Act

Post by wgdsr »

Typical Lax Dad wrote: Tue Nov 12, 2019 6:36 pm
wgdsr wrote: Tue Nov 12, 2019 6:20 pm just in the past week, we have:
chase young, maybe the most marketable (for the nc$$, anyway) football player going and a possible #1 overall pick -- ruled ineligible temporarily for taking a small loan from a family friend (don't know the whole association) so his family could go out to a bowl game. and it was paid back.

jahvon quinerly -- ruled he has to sit a year on new hardship transfer rules, no waiver granted as he had to deal with a cloud of suspicion the entirety of his freshman year re: basketball fbi fishnet, only to eventually have none of his involvement amount to any charge and be walked back by the coach in question ---transfers to alabama for fresh start, villanova is cool with it --- but nc$$ says no go, sit a year.

memphis star freshman james wiseman ruled ineligible (also, maybe the best freshman in the country) because his then high school/club coach penny hardaway gave him moving expenses, over 2 years ago. all fine. but penny is now the memphis coach (and was considered a booster from a donation 10+ years ago), and after a hard fought recruiting win vs kentucky for his services, wiseman gets to be ruled ineligible. lmao. you couldn't make this up. hardaway is taking a stand against the wounded nc$$ and playing him anyway, looking for a ruling outside the nc$$.

one week. 3 instances of the nc$$ holding fast to b.s. minutiae and their iron, illogical grip. ironically, that hubris will ultimately be their ruling power's downfall.
Penny Hardaway should have known better. He should have went to the AD and the NCAA when he was vying for the job and then recruiting the player. IMHO, Penny put the kid in a tough spot. How he though this was not an extra benefit is beyond me. Hopefully Wiseman gets to come back but Hardaway should have known better. Ego. Guy gave $1MM to the school and provided extra benefits to what became a recruit. Penny should have cleared it or sent the kid on to UK.
it's not that simple. according to the university, they knew about it well in advance at some point, and according to them, so did the nc$$. and again according to them, the nc$$ signed off on it, preventing wiseman from going elsewhere with the "change of ruling". if that's what happened:
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-ba ... dcbr6c2365
also in there, again according to the university, supposedly wiseman never knew about it. remembering cases (cam newton?), i think that matters.

for some reason, i don't think penny is gonna be the guy to dot all your i's and cross your t's:
https://www.commercialappeal.com/story/ ... 2535152001

anyway -- memphis signed off on penny playing him anyway, and fighting the battle in court. so they seem fine with it. on a number of fronts, i think they may have the leg up.
this may be end up being the most formidable challenge to the nc$$ eligibility rulings, maybe ever. i don't remember a school saying i don't care what your ruling on ineligibility is, we're playing him anyway.

worst case scenario for the player -- he doesn't get to keep playing for memphis. assesses options for the winter. gets an agent, works out or plays somewhere, and is top 4 instead of top 1. loses a bit on development also, but a trade on getting access to $$ earlier probably. good chance he was always going to be one and done, unless he had a rough year, in which case this might help him in some ways. i don't like writing any of that.
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 34170
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: Fair Pay to Play Act

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

OSU also allowed Young to play until the “likely” ineligible ruling came along. Penny donated $1MM to the school, provided extra benefits and then became the coach and recruited the kid anyway. I don’t blame the player. I blame Hardaway. He runs an AAU program....had plenty of players recruited. He knows the rule. If a former UVA player funded a lax facility, then moved a lacrosse player to Charlottesville and paid $11k ( who knows what else) and then became head coach, he could recruit that player no problem? Really? Nobody would notice?
“I wish you would!”
wgdsr
Posts: 9997
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2018 7:00 pm

Re: Fair Pay to Play Act

Post by wgdsr »

i'd be willing to bet the nc$$ has no specific language on this considering the order of events. and i think the order of events matter.
hardaway was not the university coach when he provided expenses.
hardaway didn't know the kid for almost a decade after he gave the donation. that's specious.

once hired, he should be able to recruit the kid to his new job. if it says he can't within the rules, fine --- but given the order of events, i'd find that to be really weird. my guess is it takes an interpretation, not an absolute letter of the law.

if the university and the nc$$ both actually knew about the whole scenario and each passed it thru, i don't see how they lose the fight under today's newly changing circumstances. and if the proof side is on wiseman not knowing about the loan, it's a slam dunk.

and yeah --- i'd be ok with it, given the timeline of events, if nc$$ rules don't spell it out otherwise.
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 34170
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: Fair Pay to Play Act

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

wgdsr wrote: Tue Nov 12, 2019 8:03 pm i'd be willing to bet the nc$$ has no specific language on this considering the order of events. and i think the order of events matter.
hardaway was not the university coach when he provided expenses.
hardaway didn't know the kid for almost a decade after he gave the donation. that's specious.

once hired, he should be able to recruit the kid to his new job. if it says he can't within the rules, fine --- but given the order of events, i'd find that to be really weird. my guess is it takes an interpretation, not an absolute letter of the law.

if the university and the nc$$ both actually knew about the whole scenario and each passed it thru, i don't see how they lose the fight under today's newly changing circumstances. and if the proof side is on wiseman not knowing about the loan, it's a slam dunk.

and yeah --- i'd be ok with it, given the timeline of events, if nc$$ rules don't spell it out otherwise.
Read the language on NCAA boosters. It’s clear:

http://www.ncaa.org/enforcement/role-boosters

Penny got greedy. Put the kid in a bad spot. Should have let him go to Kentucky...if Penny wasn’t the walking definition of a booster, I don’t know who is. What I understand is that he passed a standard eligibility review that all High profile recruits are subject to.
“I wish you would!”
Typical Lax Dad
Posts: 34170
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm

Re: Fair Pay to Play Act

Post by Typical Lax Dad »

Chase Young will miss the Rutgers game and then return. It’s a good outcome for him and The Ohio State University.
“I wish you would!”
Post Reply

Return to “D1 MENS LACROSSE”